clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 599   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

INDEX. 599
REPRESENTATION AMONG COLLATERALS.
A. died intestate, leaving Uncles and aunts, and the children of uncles and
aunts. HELD—
That under the act of 1820, ch. 171, sec. 4, the uncles and aunts are
entitled to the whole real estate, to the exclusion of the children
of the deceased uncles and aunts. Levering vs. Heighe, 81.
RES GESTAE.
See EVIDEMCB, 3, 4, 5, 15.
RESULTING TRUSTS.
See TRUTS, 2.
RIPARIAN PROPRIETORS, RIGHTS OF.
Owners of lands bordering upon navigable waters, are, as riparian pro-
prietors, entitled to any increase of the soil which may result from the
gradual recession of the waters from the shore, or from accretion by
alluvion, or from any other cause; and this is regarded as the equiva-
lent for the loss they may sustain from the breaking in, or encroafcli-
ment, of the waters upon their lands. Chapman, vs. Hoskins, 485.
SALES BY SHERIFF.
See LAPSE OF TIME, 2.
SECRET CONVEYANCES.
See RECORDING OF MORTGAGES, 1, 4.
SECRET EQUITIES.
See EOTITABLE LIEN ON LANDS.
SEPARATE ESTATE OF MARRIED WOMEN.
See EVIDENCE, 12.
SETTLEMENT.
See MISTAKE, 1, 2, 3.
SHERIFF'S RETURN TO WRIT OF FI. FA.
1. The Court of Chancery has no jurisdiction to decide that a. return to a
writ of fieri facias, or venditioni exponas, is defective—the court out
of which the writ issued, alone have cognizance of the question of
the sufficiency of the return. Welson et at. vs. Turner, 73.
2. If a defendant at law objects to the return of the sheriff, he may ap-
pear in the County Court, at the term to which the writs were return-
able, and move to quash them, or retain possession of the laftfl sold,
and efTectually defend himself in an action of ejectment, brought by
the purchaser, or upon proceedings under the act of 1825, ch, 103, if
the description of the land in the return was so far defective as to ren-
der it void fOr uncertainty. lo.
3. The father of the plaintiffs in this case, having failed to adopt either of
these modetSJirf resistance, and having, by various acts and declara-
tions, free froin all e^Hivo^atioo, or doubt, acknowledged the perfect
validity of the purchaser's title—under these circumstances, there can
be no principltj of equity which would justify the active interposition
of this court in his favor, or in favor of those who claim under
him. J6.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
1. There can bo no doubt that a court of equity will enforce the specific

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 2, Page 599   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives